Is time travel ethical?

Dirk said:

Have to gather my thoughts.

Click to expand...

Okay, i'll give it a shot now. I was distracted by someone.

Firstly, i'll state the obvious - something being old does not make it correct, or even necessarily acceptable.

Now, as for the bible itself, i might interject here. When King James had the bible written, he didn't have access to the dead sea scrolls, which have the oldest version of the Old Testament that we know of.

And in regards to the New Testament, i have a reading suggestion for you. I couldn't express myself as well, or as holistically as Bart Ehrman. But if you're very interested in the NT of the bible, i'd suggest his book "Misquoting Jesus - Who Changed The Bible And Why".

There were also many more varieties of Christian beliefs - for example, some believed all the gods in the bible were real, they just weren't theirs. If you're interested in that, "Lost Christianities", by the same author is good. I haven't read all of either book, just yet, but i've a LOT of reading material i haven't got through.

But the point is, the bible was changed drastically many many times. For a huge number of reasons. They were linguistic, political, ideological, for the purposes of consistency and of credibility, not to mention new information coming to light. The bible is incredibly highly edited. It is possibly one of the most unreliable sources of the time. Not to mention that it probably wasn't written by the apostles themselves.

My advice would be to consult the works of biblical scholars (not to be confused with christian scholars) - there's quite a wealth of overwhelming information. They can present it better than me. Also, i'm relatively new to it - i've only just started reading up on it.

Sorry that my information is so limited, but i hope it helps.

Dirk said:

Okay, i'll give it a shot now. I was distracted by someone.

Click to expand...

That's ok. Your arguments are by and large irrational.

Firstly, i'll state the obvious - something being old does not make it correct, or even necessarily acceptable.

Click to expand...

I didn't say being old by itself has meaning. I was responding to the poster who was just denying the existence of heaven without evidence. I referred to the fact that after a certain amount of time something that is in written form can be considered "history", not "hearsay". In other words whether or not you choose to believe it, it can at least be accepted as some evidence to support an argument. Since he had responded without any evidence at all and I at least offered some evidence, I wrote that his argument was mere opinion while mine had the weight of history to bolster it. Just a fun argument to make.

Now, as for the bible itself, i might interject here. When King James had the bible written, he didn't have access to the dead sea scrolls, which have the oldest version of the Old Testament that we know of.

Click to expand...

King James did not have the Bible written. The KJV was merely interpreted out of the Latin into English so that it could be understood by Englishmen. Prior to that all copies were in Latin which gave the Pope a stranglehold on power in England through the priesthood. Once every Englishman could access the Bible himself in his own language, English royalty was able to strengthen its hold on England free of Papal interference.

There were also many more varieties of Christian beliefs - for example, some believed all the gods in the bible were real, they just weren't theirs. If you're interested in that, "Lost Christianities", by the same author is good. I haven't read all of either book, just yet, but i've a LOT of reading material i haven't got through.

Click to expand...

That belief is consistent with today's Bible. When Scripture says that the Lord is "Lord of lords, God of gods," that is inferred reference to the fact that there is more than one god. BTW, reading directly from the source can give you stronger arguments than just trying to wing it with other peoples' opinions of the real McCoy.

But the point is, the bible was changed drastically many many times. For a huge number of reasons. They were linguistic, political, ideological, for the purposes of consistency and of credibility, not to mention new information coming to light. The bible is incredibly highly edited. It is possibly one of the most unreliable sources of the time. Not to mention that it probably wasn't written by the apostles themselves.

Click to expand...

One of its strengths of the Old Testament is apparently (according to the scholars) that it has come from so many sources widely separated by time (sometimes thousands of years), distance (thousands of miles at times when travel was not so easy) and belief (throughout pre-modern times), all of which remained consistent with each other in its major points.

My advice would be to consult the works of biblical scholars (not to be confused with christian scholars) - there's quite a wealth of overwhelming information. They can present it better than me. Also, i'm relatively new to it - i've only just started reading up on it.

Sorry that my information is so limited, but i hope it helps.

Click to expand...

All for the sake of teasing one poster that I came up with "some" evidence but he had none? Naaaaaaaawww. Not tonight, anyway. :giggle:

chuck schmidt said:

That's ok. Your arguments are by and large irrational.

Click to expand...

How kind of you to say so!

King James did not have the Bible written.

Click to expand...

Haha! I know. But it's the most used.

That belief is consistent with today's Bible. When Scripture says that the Lord is "Lord of lords, God of gods," that is inferred reference to the fact that there is more than one god. BTW, reading directly from the source can give you stronger arguments than just trying to wing it with other peoples' opinions of the real McCoy.

Click to expand...

I know. I've read the bible several times. It was just a Non Sequitur. I just find it fascinating how they vary compared to current beliefs. I thought you might too. Sorry i wasn't clearer.

Dirk said:

I know. I've read the bible several times.

Click to expand...

Why bother after the first time? The Truth is that the bible was written by a human being with serious psychological issues. The bible is a ridiculous and lie-based book and there is not a single shred of legitimate evidence that the bible contains any words from a god creature, just as there is not a single shred of legitimate evidence that there might be a god creature.

Delusional constructs : god creature >>> bible >>> heaven - all of these are really one and the same delusion and not a single shred of legitimate evidence supports their claims.

His argument is off topic and deranged. His fallacy is simply one of supporting one delusion by another delusion where both have zero evidence for them, and a mountain of arguments against them.

He is trying to do the "prove the negative" game against with his heaven delusion.

I was responding to the poster who was just denying the existence of heaven without evidence.

Click to expand...

You made the positive claim, not Me. You need the evidence. You know you have none.

I referred to the fact that after a certain amount of time something that is in written form can be considered "history", not "hearsay".

Click to expand...

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to believe that the bible contains one grain of Truth or that it was written by a god creature (or on behalf on said creature - evidently god creature cannot write). To suggest that because it is old it must contain accurate claims is retarded and deranged.

In other words whether or not you choose to believe it, it can at least be accepted as some evidence to support an argument.

Click to expand...

The bible is not evidence of heaven, because it has nothing to do with heaven. All the claims made in the bible are false, and are written by deranged humans. There is no reason to believe that it was written by a god creature. None.

Since he had responded without any evidence at all and I at least offered some evidence,

Click to expand...

You offered zero legitimate evidence.

See? He will just argue incessantly. Just ignore his off-topic rants.

Dirk said:

How kind of you to say so!

Click to expand...

Wrong word. Off topic.

Haha! I know. But it's the most used.

Click to expand...

Authority? By whom?

Seer Travis Truman said:

The Truth is that the bible was written by a human being with serious psychological issues.

Click to expand...

And your evidence for this is ....?

Seer Travis Truman said:

The bible is a ridiculous and lie-based book and there is not a single shred of legitimate evidence that the bible contains any words from a god creature, just as there is not a single shred of legitimate evidence that there might be a god creature.

Click to expand...

Neither is there a single shred of evidence that there is not a God. It can neither be proven or disproven.

deanhills said:

And your evidence for this is ....?

Click to expand...

Good question. God addicts take note about what happens when a sane and rational individual is asked for evidence

of his positive claim.

Positive claim : "The Truth is that the bible was written by a human being with serious psychological issues."

The bible itself is one such evidence. Since there is no god creature the bible could only have been written by a

human being.

Lets take an example fairy-tale comment from the bible :

"for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third

and fourth generation of them that hate me"

Lets analyse this bible quote. Firstly, we see jealousy. Jealousy is a human emotion, so whoever wrote the bible

must be human. Of course, you might be thinking "but why cant god have jealousy?"

Here is why : Jealousy work like this...you can only be jealous of that which is better than you or what you

have. For example, jealous of a neighbors good fortune, jealous of his new BMW, or his wife etc. You cannot be

jealous of something that is wholly worse than what you have. In other words, what he has that you perceive to be

good or better than what you do.

Since god is all-powerful, how can he be jealous of a mere human that he himself created? He could not be. He

claims that there are no other gods, that he is the one True god. What then can possibly make him jealous? God

created man, and since he supposedly knows everything and refused to reveal himself he would be responsible and

except that outcome.

No all-powerful creature could ever become insecure and jealous and feel the need to get mortal humans to worship

him. Is is ridiculous!

Humans are jealous and insecure. Societal leaders are very paranoid and insecure human beings. Obviously, the

book was written by (or on behalf of) a societal leader. This leader is insecure and this is clearly reflected

throughout the bible, as he literally begs for humans to worship and follow him.

I also notice that the writer has issues with his father, that he is an abused child. Well, god does not have a

father, it is the human being who wrote the bible who has a father, that is angry. How could a real all-powerful

god need to use children as poisoncontainers? It makes no sense! He did not even supposedly have a father, and so

how could he abused by a father himself? If he was not abused (or did not have a father) then why even mention

that he is jealous and visits the "inequity" of the father upon the children?

Obviously, the societal leaders who wrote this is an angry insecure power-crazed victim of child abuse by his

father.

Neither is there a single shred of evidence that there is not a God. It can neither be proven or

disproven.

Click to expand...

I have already answer that. Read the OP, and previous discussion to get up to speed.

Seer Travis Truman said:

Good question. God addicts take note about what happens when a sane and rational individual is asked for evidence of his positive claim.

Positive claim : "The Truth is that the bible was written by a human being with serious psychological issues."

The bible itself is one such evidence. Since there is no god creature the bible could only have been written by a human being.

Click to expand...

I don't agree with you that there is no God. But I do believe that the Bible was written by a number of human beings. You made an allegation that they had serious psychological issues however, what is your evidence for that?

Seer Travis Truman said:

Lets take an example fairy-tale comment from the bible :

"for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third

and fourth generation of them that hate me"

Lets analyse this bible quote. Firstly, we see jealousy. Jealousy is a human emotion, so whoever wrote the bible

must be human. Of course, you might be thinking "but why cant god have jealousy?"

Here is why : Jealousy work like this...you can only be jealous of that which is better than you or what you

have. For example, jealous of a neighbors good fortune, jealous of his new BMW, or his wife etc. You cannot be

jealous of something that is wholly worse than what you have. In other words, what he has that you perceive to be

good or better than what you do.

Since god is all-powerful, how can he be jealous of a mere human that he himself created? He could not be. He

claims that there are no other gods, that he is the one True god. What then can possibly make him jealous? God

created man, and since he supposedly knows everything and refused to reveal himself he would be responsible and

except that outcome.

No all-powerful creature could ever become insecure and jealous and feel the need to get mortal humans to worship

him. Is is ridiculous!

Humans are jealous and insecure. Societal leaders are very paranoid and insecure human beings. Obviously, the

book was written by (or on behalf of) a societal leader. This leader is insecure and this is clearly reflected

throughout the bible, as he literally begs for humans to worship and follow him.

I also notice that the writer has issues with his father, that he is an abused child. Well, god does not have a

father, it is the human being who wrote the bible who has a father, that is angry. How could a real all-powerful

god need to use children as poisoncontainers? It makes no sense! He did not even supposedly have a father, and so

how could he abused by a father himself? If he was not abused (or did not have a father) then why even mention

that he is jealous and visits the "inequity" of the father upon the children?

Obviously, the societal leaders who wrote this is an angry insecure power-crazed victim of child abuse by his

father.


I have already answer that. Read the OP, and previous discussion to get up to speed.

Click to expand...

The Bible is probably one of the oldest books on earth. I don't believe the chapters in it all arrived on the same time. They evolved. Most of what is in the Bible is hearsay, and has worked through hundreds and perhaps thousands of translations. Language! Seem to remember that you mentioned somewhere one should watch out for language when you are in the pursuit of truth. As it can con you? I can't take anything literally in the Bible. I don't read it with the head. I read it with the heart. And with faith. The above is not proof for me. There are millions of people who pick and choose their "piece" from the Bible to hack it into pieces. When the Bible already consists of piece-meal contributions that have been translated heavily over and over again, if they analyze it with the head, they will just have more and not less pieces.

deanhills said:

I don't agree with you that there is no God. But I do believe that the Bible was written by a number of human beings.

Click to expand...

Your belief in god is not factually-correct. It is just a delusion. Ok, so you realize at least that the bible is written by human being.

You made an allegation that they had serious psychological issues however, what is your evidence for that?

Click to expand...

There is a mountain of evidence all throughout every page of the book, starting with the fact that anyone who claims that god exists is suffering from a delusional reasoning disorder.

The Bible is probably one of the oldest books on earth. I don't believe the chapters in it all arrived on the same time. They evolved. Most of what is in the Bible is hearsay, and has worked through hundreds and perhaps thousands of translations.

Click to expand...

Does not matter. All versions are clearly the work of a genocidal and deranged meglomaniac.

Language! Seem to remember that you mentioned somewhere one should watch out for language when you are in the pursuit of truth. As it can con you? I can't take anything literally in the Bible.

Click to expand...

Language-based brainwashing is nothing to do with interpretations.

I don't read it with the head. I read it with the heart. And with faith.

Click to expand...

You most certainly dont read anything that would shatter your own personal delusions with your head. You could not bear to, because then you would have to face a shred of Truth.

The above is not proof for me.

Click to expand...

No proof is proof to you, because you just deny it.

There are millions of people who pick and choose their "piece" from the Bible to hack it into pieces. When the Bible already consists of piece-meal contributions that have been translated heavily over and over again, if they analyze it with the head, they will just have more and not less pieces.

Click to expand...

Does not matter. All known manuscripts say roughly the same thing. Even the gist of it is enough.

There is interpretation and there is denial. If I say "I went to the shops today" we cannot "interpret" that into "My computer is functioning correctly". Sorry, that pitiful defense has been tried before. It fails.

Seer Travis Truman said:

Ok, so you realize at least that the bible is written by human being.

Click to expand...

That sounds a bit condescending, doesn't it?

Seer Travis Truman said:

There is a mountain of evidence all throughout every page of the book, starting with the fact that anyone who claims that god exists is suffering from a delusional reasoning disorder.

Click to expand...

In your view perhaps. Not in mine.

Seer Travis Truman said:

Language-based brainwashing is nothing to do with interpretations.

Click to expand...

You mean words only have different meanings when it serves your "truth"?

Seer Travis Truman said:

You most certainly dont read anything that would shatter your own personal delusions with your head. You could not bear to, because then you would have to face a shred of Truth.

Click to expand...

Maybe so. Thank goodness I have a heart. I'm almost certain that without it, I would have been incarcerated by now.

Seer Travis Truman said:

No proof is proof to you, because you just deny it.

Click to expand...

Your statement about no proof is a denial in itself. We can go round and round in circles in this reasoning. You have no proof that God does not exist.

Seer Travis Truman said:

There is interpretation and there is denial. If I say "I went to the shops today" we cannot "interpret" that into "My computer is functioning correctly". Sorry, that pitiful defense has been tried before. It fails.

Click to expand...

I can't tie up the Bible with this analogy. Can you explain better please?

I didn't believe that time traveling is possible it was only saying and it has nothing to deal with reality.

I don't think that time travel is possible for a very log time and even if it were possible there would be too many complications. i mean there is no way that a person who went from the future to the past, would not effect the outcome in some way or the other, which could lead to consequences.

David said:

Did you not watch the video? People have already traveled forward in time, albeit only slightly. Ho does it not have anything to do with reality?

Click to expand...

give me the link I want to read the whole article..!! That Isn't possible!!

i dont see any issue with time traveling and social ethics? why did this thought arise??

I would favour it if one goes to the past, we can correct our worst mistakes and get relaxed. However, we do not have the right to know our future in advance, so that we may not forget the taste of unexpected happiness and sorrow.

David said:

What's wrong with knowing what's coming? Messing with the past can just mess things up even worse but future can mean 10k years of advancement and knowledge of disasters all at once.

Click to expand...

Eh, I doubt it'd be that simple. Even if we went ahead and got all those cool tech and scientific secrets, we might not go through the same process of failures and struggles to get there. While that might seem like a good thing, it could potentially not be if you believe civilization and society can learn and adapt from its past mistakes.

David said:

What's wrong with knowing what's coming? Messing with the past can just mess things up even worse but future can mean 10k years of advancement and knowledge of disasters all at once.

Click to expand...

Heck I would rather go back and stay. I fit right in there.

Even if possible, changing the past is not good, no matter how bad the past may be, because the future consequences are unknown. Changing the future, if it is bad, may be a good thing, but the only way to do this is by changing the present.